MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407285986 · doi:10.2196/58107

Development and Validation of a Machine Learning Algorithm for Predicting Diabetes Retinopathy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Algorithm Development Study

2025· article· en· W4407285986 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sun Young Kim, Jaeyu Park, Yejun Son, Hojae Lee, Selin Woo, Myeongcheol Lee, Hayeon Lee, Hyunji Sang, Dong Keon Yon, Sang Youl Rhee

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal Imaging and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgorithmMedicineDiabetic retinopathyDyslipidemiaCohortMachine learningReceiver operating characteristicType 2 Diabetes MellitusMedical recordKidney diseaseArtificial intelligenceDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineDiseaseComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is the leading cause of preventable blindness worldwide. Machine learning (ML) systems can enhance DR in community-based screening. However, predictive power models for usability and performance are still being determined. Objective: This study used data from 3 university hospitals in South Korea to conduct a simple and accurate assessment of ML-based risk prediction for the development of DR that can be universally applied to adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: DR was predicted using data from 2 independent electronic medical records: a discovery cohort (one hospital, n=14,694) and a validation cohort (2 hospitals, n=1856). The primary outcome was the presence of DR at 3 years. Different ML-based models were selected through hyperparameter tuning in the discovery cohort, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was analyzed in both cohorts. Results: Among 14,694 patients screened for inclusion, 348 (2.37%) were diagnosed with DR. For DR, the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) system had an accuracy of 75.13% (95% CI 74.10-76.17), a sensitivity of 71.00% (95% CI 66.83-75.17), and a specificity of 75.23% (95% CI 74.16-76.31) in the original dataset. Among the validation datasets, XGBoost had an accuracy of 65.14%, a sensitivity of 64.96%, and a specificity of 65.15%. The most common feature in the XGBoost model is dyslipidemia, followed by cancer, hypertension, chronic kidney disease, neuropathy, and cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: This approach shows the potential to enhance patient outcomes by enabling timely interventions in patients with T2DM, improving our understanding of contributing factors, and reducing DR-related complications. The proposed prediction model is expected to be both competitive and cost-effective, particularly for primary care settings in South Korea.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical InformaticsSame topicRetinal Imaging and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207